D&D 5E Beast master wants to use pet to get +5 to passive perception

[Lyxen]

Case reopened! (I have as much power to reopen cases as you do to close them.)

You can say whatever you want, but you usually need a solid case to do this, and clearly you don't, since you have not found even one sentence in the rules or the devs intent to support you, se below.

Narrowly applying this rule to whatever you think "travel" means and also apparently only to group checks (so far as I can tell?) looks to be your way of dismissing the rule

I'm not dismissing it, I'm applying when mandated, which is better than you choosing to ignore words in the rule when they don't suit you.

Don't you think that, if the rule wanted to say that characters engaged in activity simply don't get a passive perception check for surprise and noticing creatures, it would have been written that way, rather than "not contributing to the group success ?" 5e rules are simple and straightforward. Ignoring words to suit what you think is the intent, when actually the devs themselves tell you taht you are wrong, is simply absurd.

thereby making Perception stronger in your games than may be intended.

And I have shown you the intent from the lead developper, which tells you, once more, that you are wrong about the intention, just as you are about the rules, since the intent, written again and again and again is that passive perception is always. Do you deny this ? Do you have any supporting evidence that the intent is as you claim ? No, obviously, since you would have produced it by now. So you are wrong about this as you are about the rules.

It looks to me like you just don't like travel

Look man, just read the PH, OK ? The whole game does not think that travel is important in general: "The DM can summarize the adventurers' movement without calculating exact distances or travel times: "You travel through the forest and find the dungeon entrance late in the evening of the third day." Even in a dungeon, particularly a large dungeon or a cave network, the DM can summarize movement between encounters: "After killing the guardian at the entrance to the ancient dwarven stronghold, you consult your map, which leads you through miles of echoing corridors to a chasm bridged by a narrow stone arch."

Sometimes it's important, though, to know how long it takes to get from one spot to another, whether the answer is in days, hours, or minutes. The rules for determining travel time depend on two factors: the speed and travel pace of the creatures moving and the terrain they're moving over."

So, sometimes, it's important, and you use the travel rules. Otherwise, it's just a summary from the DM.

Please stop with the OneTrueWayism of "Because I need the travel rules to impose a restriction on perception - that I'm scared of - everyone has to use the travel rules all the time, otherwise they are not following the rules and this is contrary to the intent of the game". The game has no such intent (passive perception is always on, word of the lead designers, so deal with it) and travel is a small subsection of the game, that is generally ignored and summarised by the DM, because it's not as interesting as actually exploring, fighting and having social encounters.

I'm cutting the part where you insult my way of gaming and again claim the high and mighty position of following rules, which is funny because you don't even read the one sentence that you like to its end.

 

[Lyxen]

There doesn't have to be a marching order or group movement.

What do you call it when you equalise

Unless you're arguing that one person can't travel. Since 1 person can travel, and movement by 5e RAW is traveling

No, it's not . You have constantly failed to prove this. Movement is just movement. Travel is "sometimes" used when you want to know how long it takes to travel somewhere, but most of the time, it's simply summarised by the DM: "The DM can summarize the adventurers' movement without calculating exact distances or travel times"

when P1 goes to scout stealthily down the passage the travel rules involving stealth and slower movement kick in.

Where does it say, in the rules, that the travel rules kick in ? Show me. The exact sentence.

And, by the way, you are wrong, there is no limit on stealth due to speed. Dashing does not diminish your stealth check, RAW. The ONLY thing that the rules say is that "While traveling, a group of adventurers can move at a normal, fast, or slow pace". But if I'm just playing a rogue, I can use double dash every single round and still get the benefit of my stealth. Prove that it's not the case, RAW.

The normal travel pace rules kick in when he walks to the door. When P3 walks(travels) to the sarcophagus and inspects it, he is distracted by his actions and gets no passive perception to notice stealthy threats/traps(other than on the sarcophagus).

Where is this rule ? I don't see it. Please show it to me.

P2 doesn't move, but is distracted and doesn't get his passive perception if anything happens while he is doing that.

Again, show me the rule. Show me the exact rule that says that if combat starts, right now, he does not get his passive perception against the stealth checks of every single ambusher.

They aren't different in declaration, but are different in results. Someone focused on listening at the door isn't going to be able to use passive perception to notice the threat sneaking down the stairs to the tomb behind the party. Someone drawing a map is going to be focused on map stuff and is not going to get passive perception for that group, either. I would give P2 a perception roll with disadvantage, though, since he's explicitly near the exit and might get lucky.

You can do whatever you want in your game, but no rule supports this. Moreover, the podcast on stealth clearly shows you that it's not the intent. Even totally engrossed in a play, the person that the adventurer is trying to sneak up to (who should, as per the stealth rule, automatically see a foe approaching) still gets his passive perception. That's the intent, clear as day, and the rules absolutely support this.

 

[Maxperson]

That's what the rules say. The rules tell you, explicitly, that:

• Use the passive Wisdom (Perception) scores of the characters to determine whether anyone in the group notices a hidden threat.

That's a group check, since it mentions the group, and travelling is all about the group (averaging of speeds, etc.). And this is where, of course, the sentence about characters engaged in other activities not contributing to the group check, which is normal.

That's NOT a group check. That's an individual check that everyone in the group makes. It cannot be a group check if some group members can be surprised while others are not.

It's totally separate from the above, it's the individual check on surprise that the combat rules mandate. And this is for absolutely everyone: "The DM determines who might be surprised. If neither side tries to be stealthy, they automatically notice each other. Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side."

Specific beats general, though. The general rule on surprise fails to defeat the specific rules that say that if you are distracted, you do not get a passive check.

 

[Maxperson]

What do you call it when you equalise



No, it's not . You have constantly failed to prove this. Movement is just movement. Travel is "sometimes" used when you want to know how long it takes to travel somewhere, but most of the time, it's simply summarised by the DM: "The DM can summarize the adventurers' movement without calculating exact distances or travel times"



Where does it say, in the rules, that the travel rules kick in ? Show me. The exact sentence.

And, by the way, you are wrong, there is no limit on stealth due to speed. Dashing does not diminish your stealth check, RAW. The ONLY thing that the rules say is that "While traveling, a group of adventurers can move at a normal, fast, or slow pace". But if I'm just playing a rogue, I can use double dash every single round and still get the benefit of my stealth. Prove that it's not the case, RAW.



Where is this rule ? I don't see it. Please show it to me.



Again, show me the rule. Show me the exact rule that says that if combat starts, right now, he does not get his passive perception against the stealth checks of every single ambusher.



You can do whatever you want in your game, but no rule supports this. Moreover, the podcast on stealth clearly shows you that it's not the intent. Even totally engrossed in a play, the person that the adventurer is trying to sneak up to (who should, as per the stealth rule, automatically see a foe approaching) still gets his passive perception. That's the intent, clear as day, and the rules absolutely support this.

We've already shown you the rule ad nauseum, but you keep misreading it or misunderstanding it. You choose some vague notion that travel has to mean long distances when the rules say otherwise. You choose some vague notion that travel in dungeons means walking through it on the way somewhere else, when the rules show otherwise.

 

[Iry]

Once more, please show me, in the rules, where your "OneTrueWayism" that "there is always a marching order" is supported. You can play that way, but you will have to do better than this to prove that the rules require it all the time. I'll be waiting.

Multiple posters have shown you the relevant rules. Nothing I show you will matter. The DC is beyond me, and more eloquent speakers than myself have rolled Nat 20s and failed.

 

[Lyxen]

Perception is not a group roll. That's why some people in the party can be surprised while others are not.

It's not the same check. Read the travel rules. The example is clear.

"Otherwise, the DM compares the Dexterity (Stealth) checks of anyone hiding with the passive Wisdom (Perception) score of each creature on the opposing side." - Compared to each creature, singular, on the opposing side. This further backed up by...

And this is exactly why people do not lose their passive perception, EVER.

"Any character or monster that doesn't notice a threat is surprised at the start of the encounter." - Any character or monster, singular, that doesn't notice is surprised. And...

And again why it's ANY character or monster, without any restriction.

"If you're surprised, you can't move or take an action on your first turn of the combat, and you can't take a reaction until that turn ends." - If you, singular, are surprised... Lastly...

See above, totally supports what I'm saying.

"A member of a group can be surprised even if the other members aren't." - This is definitively saying that passive perception to notice threats is NOT a group check.

Tsss, you are not following the section from the travel rules. Surprise is only rolled when the combat starts. But when combat starts, it's not exploration anymore, it's combat. And it's certainly not travelling anymore, even if you were using the rules before.

Noticing threats is a general section in the travel rule, and it might be in use or not (and usually it's not, because the DM summarises travel). But assuming it is, it's clearly a group activity, where everyone travels at the same pace, for example. Nothing says that the checks there replace those of surprise. It's actually the contrary.

 

[Lyxen]

That's not a marching order. A marching order is...

P1: "Okay DM. The fighter is up front, followed by the cleric, then the wizard and last will be the rogue. We're putting our most observant guy in the back, because we like walking into traps."

When in a room like that and everyone is declaring actions, each PC is essentially moving(or not moving) as an independent group.

You can see it that way, and it's sort of supported by the rule on splitting group in the travel section. So if you absolutely want to use these rules (nothing says you can't, I'm just pointing out that nothing says you must either), that's the way to do it.

I'm just pointing out that I very much doubt that every single time an adventurer moves independently across a room to inspect a candelabra, you ask him his travel pace and if he is using forced march...

 

[Lyxen]

Multiple posters have shown you the relevant rules.

Iry: "Multiple posters have shown you the relevant rules."

Nope. and the fact that you are still staying "rules" and not being able to quote it (since it does not say anything of the kind) is proof enough that you are uncomfortable.

And the fact that "multiple posters" include such a shadow account (see below) is very interesting as well.

Nothing I show you will matter. The DC is beyond me, and more eloquent speakers than myself have rolled Nat 20s and failed.

You have never shown ANYTHING, actually. Not ONE rule, not ONE element of support from devs. NOTHING.

On the other hand, I have given you clear examples from the rule and extremely clear intent from the lead dev. Are you denying this as well ?

Edit: Interesting the courage of some people who create shadow accounts to do ... what exactly ? And then disappear with a last message of "I'm denying you the ability to read my posts at all. Including this one.". Too bad that I read them anyway. Even in this, it's a failure...

 

[Iry]

Nope. and the fact that you are still staying "rules" and not being able to quote it (since it does not say anything of the kind) is proof enough that you are uncomfortable.
You have never shown ANYTHING, actually. Not ONE rule, not ONE element of support from devs. NOTHING.
On the other hand, I have given you clear examples from the rule and extremely clear intent from the lead dev. Are you denying this as well ?

I realize I'm the one who engaged you first. I will correct that immediately.

 

[Lyxen]

It's a part of many combats, depending on what the sides are attempting.

Exactly my perspective, just adding that the rule is, RAW, part of each and every combat (although, obviously, it can be dealt very quickly in a lot of cases).

But it's a dangerous world, and surprise is such a powerful element in fights which are quick and dirty (especially in 5e) that every intelligent (and many less intelligent will do it by instinct) will probably try to achieve it if there is even the slightest possibility. And, gaming wise, one more round to act, and possibly advantage on attacks is extremely powerful.